You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Self-voting user list since HF19
Buying SP and then self-voting isn't investing, it's just draining funds from the reward pool that could (should?) be used to reward authors, otherwise STEEM isn't worth anything. Voting on others earns you curation rewards without any negative effects to the platform. The less you vote on others, the more you're hurting your own investment.
This isn't about what people are earning, it's about the way they're "earning" it.
No it isn't. The reward pool is fixed in terms of STEEM but not in terms of value (dollars, etc.). STEEM only gets its value from people buying it or holding it. Without people buying it, you can earn all the STEEM you want from the reward pool, but they will be worthless.
Someone who buys SP and then selfvotes is not 'draining' anything and at best can get back a portion of what was put in. It causes no harm at all.
Investors are the ones who underwrite all of the rewards on this platform. If you are not an investor, or are only a smaller investor, you need to focus your efforts on creating inspiring content that makes investors want to give their money to you. Whatever else they do or don't do with their money (including self-voting) is not your concern and does not harm you in any way. Nevertheless, you do have a downvote that you can use to disagree with what you think are underserved rewards. I suggest using it.
How can you not see the harm in self-voting? I just don't get it, it's so unbelievably obvious why it's bad. All you have to do is think about what value this platform has if nobody voted on others.
Of course people can do with their money whatever they want, but self-voting just isn't smart (except for content promotion obviously). Your alt account only self-votes 4% and i'll assume your main is similar, so you're a good boy :p
I do have a downvote of a few cents yeah, but i can't do anything against your upvote for example ;)
That's not what is happening. If it were, and you posted about it, you would have a useful contribution (though of course everyone would have already recognized the issue most likely)
Someone who votes for good content whether produced by self or by others is not doing any harm whatsoever. Likewise someoen who votes for good self-produced content that is also supported by others is doing no harm.
Your own statistics show that self-voting is awarding about 8.5% of the reward pool. I don't find that suggestive of any problem whatsoever. It is probably a very reasonable number given that the current parameters give people 10 full power votes to make per day. Thus one is being applied to the voters' own content and nine to others' (on average, of course). Seems fine.
I have no 'alt' accounts (in the sense of accounts run by me to interact on the site and which hide my identity; there are several accounts for things like internal market trading but they all have my name in them). I don't know who runs randomwhale which likes to vote for me. It is not me.
Again, this may be viewed as a reminder to please avoid witch hunts and demonizing people without a full understanding of what is going on.
I agree, 8.5% is not that problematic at all. It's just the principle that's important. The few problematic abusers and the incentive problems in the protocol are the problem.
I have a pretty good understanding of what's going on. I don't want to demonize or shame anyone. I don't even care about the names. I impulsively released the list this way, i guess i could have done it differently, but in general we should just face the truth, no matter how harsh it is sometimes.
By the way, there are enough rumors about who's running Randowhale ;)
EDIT: oh oops you said randomwhale, yeah no idea.
I haven't cared to pay attention.
What's wrong with rewarding yourself, I would certainly love to upvote myself 10 if I had the steem power but I don't, so it's 1 or 2 cents, if they value their post at 20 dollars and upvote it, then what's wrong with that. I can tell you I have certainly benefited from the upvotes of quite a few folks on the list, and many others. It's not a spread across the ground wealth thing here, part of your earning depends on your investment. You don't know what folks sacrifice to reach at their SP level, don't trump the "reward pool" card.
Anyone can be a top rewarded author without buying any SP. It's all about loyal followers.
Read the white paper. People can invest in Steemit with dollars or time. Both add value. You are obsessing on the folks that bring more dollars and invest less time than you. I believe the point daudimitch is trying to make is same idea as the white paper - both time and dollars add value. And when people bring dollars, who is to say how they must use those dollars for upvotes?
If you over-rotate to the point that only time has value on steemit, and dollars are not valued, that could be argued as another path that will devalue the total platform.
I spent a week very upset about the voting behavior of the whale hendrikdegrote. He was upvoting stuff that was shit in my opinion. Vacation rentals from bookingteam.com Get real !!
But then I realized that if he wants to bring $2.5M to the platform, it is his money and how he upvotes is his business. Not my business.
It will take a lot of time and sweat to grow to the point that you or I have $2.5M of SP based on our blogging skills and the upvotes we get. True dat.
But it took hendrikdegrote time off platform to get the $2.5M fiat, and then he chose to bring it here and upvote as he chooses.
Do you want to chase all the whales away? Will that increase platform value?
Or you want to change the rules so that the only path to becoming a whale is lots of posts and being a top rewarded author, which is the path you are on?
Diversity is good. Everyone takes their own path.
Not surprisingly I got a small upvote from a whale worth $1.6M. Who woulda thunk it? LOL
And I don't mind giving myself a very small additional upvote - that comment took some time to craft and adds value to the platform by providing more opinions to the full community - who can choose to agree or disagree with my position, and then vote as they choose based on their own opinion
Over 1/3 going to blatant self promotion is not 'diversity', it's noise. It's a false dichotomy . Who is going to invest in a platform full of self voters creaming the rewards pool. Clearly, only those who want to cream the rewards pool. This problem always existed at the top level but now it goes all the way down.
If people have a million bux to invest, they will do just as well to rent cloud miners, and won't spam it up for those who actually consider the content to be the purpose of this platform. But they wouldn't get the pleasure of sucking out the rewards pool, diluting the holdings of those who do value content, and then slamming the price down with endless SBD sales and power down to steem and sell out.
It looks at first like they bring money, and then they walk away with more, and where does that leave anyone with long term investment plans?
I don't even have that much stake anymore but I'm looking for the exit, and I'm sure most people are now. The horrible thing is that right now, there is no place else that has as many decent people (!) nor, even, earning potential for honest work (!).
I'm not sitting idle to watch this go on while the best thing to replace FB and Twitter gets sucked down the sewer with this exploitative behaviour. We need something better, somewhere that stake > all is not the opinion of those with the stake.
This site has a mgmt team. Presumably they have long-term goals and a plan to achieve the long-term goals.
If they see current issues on self-voting as problematic, they can and should step in and address it.
Else we end up with community standards.
Which may or may not a positive outcome, depending on the community that chooses to join and stay
STEEM On!!
The long term goals have been published but they have made no real progress towards them. We should be some ways towards a Fabric by now, for instance. I have heard nothing, maybe I just haven't been looking. The replacement of thte database backend, by the way, is the meaning of that (splitting it into its components).
I hope all the developers didn't abandon the ship and head off to help Dan work on EOS. Always the next big thing just over the horizon. How about making this big thing the next big thing
exactly
Keep in mind some of us write 150 blogs a month on here for content and those are all upvoted, I went into that on here too.
Perspective is important along with the engagement we try and create in the community.
Post like these create bad blood, the data is tilted in a negative light, some of these folks also bring a lot of quality content on a daily basis, I am pretty sure you upvote your post as well, they made their investment in SP, don't make post in bad blood like that
Dude exactly.
No i stopped voting on my content, it's not going to change much. If the content is good it will get rewarded eventually anyway.